Villa Park redevelopment

[The Fun Factory]

It does seem strange that this consultation was done with minimal publicity with letters sent to surrounding residents and no news at all on the official AVFC website.

[andycv]

1 minute ago, The Fun Factory said:

It does seem strange that this consultation was done with minimal publicity with letters sent to surrounding residents and no news at all on the official AVFC website.

I expect this due to it being a minor change - rather than a full new application.  They may publicise when the application's submitted.

[MrBlack]

 

10 minutes ago, NeilS said:

There is also a little bit of an explanation in that article about the reason the North Stand development is going to take a while longer to build:-

North Stand Redevelopment details from Birmingham Mail

"Prior to the stand being demolished, up to seven months of preparation is needed to divert new drains, high voltage electrics and matchday safety systems, while hundreds of cables will also need to be replaced for broadcasting. It’s a huge undertaking before Villa can even begin building a completely new stand.

Knocking the stand down is viewed as the most efficient way to deliver a new North Stand, instead of building it behind the current structure, like other clubs have done across England in recent years. Building a new stand behind the current North Stand would prevent construction workers from accessing key areas of the build."

I'm not sure how building it behind the current one wouldn't be possible...there's enough room for two stands on that car park. Access was not an issue when other clubs have done this so strikes me as a bit of an odd excuse.

That said, I'm sure they would take that approach if it was genuinely feasible.

By having to re-route everything that currently goes through or under the North stand before we even start the 7 month lead time is understandable at least.

And they've already sold tickets for this season so not like they could start any earlier anyway.

Shame it's going to take so long, but anyone doubting the owners' intent needs to give their head a wobble. 

Edited July 7, 2023 by MrBlack

[OutByEaster?]

9 hours ago, maqroll said:

It's possible Heck has drawn the brakes on this because he thinks an entirely new stadium is the way forward.

There's a lot in this sentence.

I'd argue that timescales suggest that it was Purslow or the owners that have worked through the changes - the timescales on this would mean it would have been very difficult for a new man to come into the club, review the existing plans, make a major decision on them, call in the architects, planners, designers and stakeholders and re-draw those plans with minor but significant changes, then prepare them for consultation and submission to planning in six weeks. Especially since during those six weeks that new man has also launched a kit, a new crest, started recruiting a team, moved his home a couple of thousand miles, attended his first Premier League meetings and managed two major concerts at a venue he's just inherited that hasn't had one for twenty years. It just seems unlikely to me that this is a Heck change - they'll have been working through this for months.

I'd also argue that no one has drawn the brakes, perhaps turned the wheel a little bit, or erm slowed for a junction, but the plans still include exactly the same new North Stand on exactly the same schedule, with an additional building and the idea of VillaLive still (subject to confirmation in the planning app) very much on the table. If anything, you could make the claim that the new building is an addition - a booster rather than the brakes.

I'm not sure how you then go from the confirmation of an ongoing redevelopment project at Villa Park, the biggest leap forward for our existing home in over twenty years, and the development we've already undertaken of the surrounding area with our new academy facility, or our ongoing work with the council and government on the station, and our consultation with local residents on development of the stadium, something which Mr Heck has said he's very keen to do, and come up with the idea that what he's really thinking is the exact opposite - especially given that during this week's consultation, our architectural company publicly dismissed the idea by saying it would cost £1.5bn and then moving on to talking about what we're doing at Villa Park.

It is possible I guess, but everything suggests that we're at B6 for as far into the future as any of us can see.

 

 

[ender4]

33 minutes ago, NeilS said:

"Prior to the stand being demolished, up to seven months of preparation is needed to divert new drains, high voltage electrics and matchday safety systems, while hundreds of cables will also need to be replaced for broadcasting. It’s a huge undertaking before Villa can even begin building a completely new stand.

So if the start date is July 2024 and it's going to take 7 months of preparation, does that mean that the 7 months of prep starts Jan 2024?  Or does the prep start in July 2024 and the actual stand rebuild start in Jan 2025?

[thabucks]

15 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I'd argue that timescales suggest that it was Purslow or the owners that have worked through the changes - the timescales on this would mean it would have been very difficult for a new man to come into the club, review the existing plans, make a major decision on them, call in the architects, planners, designers and stakeholders and re-draw those plans with minor but significant changes, then prepare them for consultation and submission to planning in six weeks.

I think that these plans new plans would have been evaluated and designed in advance as an option at the early stages and that all would’ve have been drawn up  rather than a complete redesign ?  

[OutByEaster?]

1 minute ago, thabucks said:

I think that these plans new plans would have been evaluated and designed in advance as an option at the early stages and that all would’ve have been drawn up  rather than a complete redesign ?  

Yep, that's definitely a possibility, that the club drew up Plan B at the same time as Plan A and have always kept it as an option, but even so, given the amount of paperwork and people involved in submitting new plans, I think six weeks is still a short time frame for a new man coming in and doing it - I don't doubt he's been heavily involved, but I don't think it's been his decision.

If it has, it's all the more impressive if he's able to get things done at this kind of speed.

 

[brommy]

16 minutes ago, ender4 said:

So if the start date is July 2024 and it's going to take 7 months of preparation, does that mean that the 7 months of prep starts Jan 2024?  Or does the prep start in July 2024 and the actual stand rebuild start in Jan 2025?

As there is extensive ground work including power, water and drainage outages, I think the later date of ground work starting in July 24,  a fairly quick demolishion in early 25 and then construction from Spring 25 through to early summer 26.

[The Fun Factory]

I doubt Heck has anything to do with this, the complexity of the project, transport issues, and rampant inflation are probably the main reasons for the revised application.

Most of us thought summer 2023 was an extremely optimistic start date, 2024 is not the end of the world.

[VillaChris]

10 hours ago, maqroll said:

It's possible Heck has drawn the brakes on this because he thinks an entirely new stadium is the way forward.

What sites would we be looking at?

NEC is obvious area with the transport links and potential parking but apparently not enough land for 60k stadium around there. And it would all feel a bit West Ham going to soulless bowl miles from where our heritage is.

Smithfield site the other side of the Bullring is huge but I assume that's been snapped up.

People talked about the Alex stadium but there's no way you could get that up to 60k surely. It's even more wedged in than VP is with one station compared to the three VP has.

[VillaChris]

33 minutes ago, brommy said:

As there is extensive ground work including power, water and drainage outages, I think the later date of ground work starting in July 24,  a fairly quick demolishion in early 25 and then construction from Spring 25 through to early summer 26.

Interesting. So potentially North Stand could still be in use up to the December of 24-25 unless there's an issue with access points?

Would be annoying to not be able to get a ticket and just see it empty on the TV for six months.

[Mark Albrighton]

Do we think there’s any consideration at all that we’re coming up to our 150th year and as such they might be wary of marking the occasion with part of the ground as a building site?

Or not bothered?

Edited July 7, 2023 by Mark Albrighton

[villa4europe]

 

£100m ?? for that? come on...someone's pulled the clubs pisser, that video is not a £100m project, not even close, especially then when you apply the other comment that a complete new build stadium would be £1.5bn, a new stand and villa live would be 1/15th of that entire rebuild?

numbers dont add up

[The Fun Factory]

5 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

 

£100m ?? for that? come on...someone's pulled the clubs pisser, that video is not a £100m project, not even close, especially then when you apply the other comment that a complete new build stadium would be £1.5bn, a new stand and villa live would be 1/15th of that entire rebuild?

numbers dont add up

Anfield and Fulham's new stands are both projected to cost £80 million. These started 2-3 years ago, probably at least 20% increase in prices since then in construction I would guess. The reason new ground cost more money is that you have to find and buy land first. That could be a massive part of the budget. The entire redevelopment is going to be a about a third of the stadium if you include the work on the Trinity road. For 100 mil that is good value.

[NeilS]

1 hour ago, ender4 said:

So if the start date is July 2024 and it's going to take 7 months of preparation, does that mean that the 7 months of prep starts Jan 2024?  Or does the prep start in July 2024 and the actual stand rebuild start in Jan 2025?

I would have thought that the prep work can only start once the season has finished, as the stand won't be able to be in use with fans attending while they are diverting drains and electrics. I would think that would make a health and safety nightmare otherwise.

Having re-read the quote I am surprised that the prep work appears to be carried out before demolition of the old stand. I would have thought that demolotion was stage one, then prep work was stage 2 and then new stand build as stage 3. Hopefully someone with a bit more expertise in construction can clear that one up?

[villa4europe]

8 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said:

Anfield and Fulham's new stands are both projected to cost £80 million. These started 2-3 years ago, probably at least 20% increase in prices since then in construction I would guess. The reason new ground cost more money is that you have to find and buy land first. That could be a massive part of the budget. The entire redevelopment is going to be a about a third of the stadium if you include the work on the Trinity road. For 100 mil that is good value.

what i meant was is that £100m would be good value because its unachievable...im not surprised the project is over budget if someone told the club that the budget should be £100m

if the project tender was for the stand, villa live and then a hefty chunk of those external works (not sure how the club saw the pathway to the station falling) that's never a £100m project in a month of Sundays

said when the cutback was announced it will be a cost plan **** up, £100m for all that is definitely a cost plan **** up in my eyes

 

[brommy]

1 hour ago, VillaChris said:

Interesting. So potentially North Stand could still be in use up to the December of 24-25 unless there's an issue with access points?

Would be annoying to not be able to get a ticket and just see it empty on the TV for six months.

I'm assuming that digging the ground away at the back of the current stand (it's weirdly higher than the pitch level so removing it will give a lot more space to the concourse area of the new stand) and the associated disconnection of the electrical power of water/drainage services, would prevent the use of the North Stand even before it's demolished.

[John]

I think we need to have a really good bidding process in place this time. We need to have regard to cost and to the time each bidder gives for completion. The winning bidder needs to appreciate they are not expected to keep coming back for more money or try to extend the agreed completion date for the work, could doing that not lead to time penalties? We need to try to avoid the ever increasing costs that HS2 have suffered from and to try to ensure that we won't face the delays that seem common place with major works at the moment (such as the proposed Athletes Village at Perry Barr on the site of the Birmingham City University's North Campus that was nowhere near ready for the Commonwealth Games). 18 - 24 months seems a long time to not have one side of the stadium in use, as it is.  

[Brumstopdogs]

 

[The Fun Factory]

Access to the lower north is on Witton lane so perhaps people could still get to that even when all of the area behind the North is  closed off. But as people have said if they need to take up cables etc then it will all have to be closed off.